|
Archive main page |
click here for a bigger sunsetOne small voice in the proud tradition of FreeBlogging*Thursday, May 08, 2003posted by gbarto at 3:33 AM:Den Beste has a very interesting discussion on atheism. Among other things, he makes the argument that it is a religion of faith that he has chosen but is not necessarily proven scientific fact. Which puts him in a similar boat to me with my Christianity. I firmly hold to my Christianity because of a few events in my life that were enough proof for me; for a hardened atheist they might not have been. My religion is not something that is going to be shown as scientifically true. Nor should it have to be. What's the point of faith in such an event?Steve runs into atheists who have notebooks full of proof. I have met Christians of a similar bent and they always make me faintly worried. Is their faith so weak that they need tangible proofs to hang onto it? If so, are they the ones to be evangelizing for a faith whose strength lies not so much in miracles of matter as in miracles of compassion and love and the examples these give? I've more to say on this but I'll have to think on it. In the meantime, I'll note that I'm with Steve one-hundred percent on this sentiment: There are zealots among theists as well [as atheists], and those are the ones most likely to seek out and try to save any atheist they learn about. (Thus it is that the zealots from both sides often find each other, and they deserve one another.) * * *
French Elections, 1st round
|